User talk:CompleCCity
---- Re: Template: Item drops, Category: Item icons and Template: Image information Hi there CompleCCity, yes I'm talking to you ;-) Good job on locating the issues on IB:Image information, didn’t pay much attention to it before myself :-) , and it seems the counterpart in FRW has been doing what you’ve suggested, but I have no solid coding skills to modify the related stuff, so feel free to do so if you know the drill, or I can leave a message to Faalagorn instead. Icons with background have been there before I knew this site, and they’re mostly screenshots. However, imo original .PNG files extracted from NI are better fit for IB as all people will have different looking screenshots while original files preserve uniformity (and look shaper & better :). And if desired, we can always upload new files separately then move old screenshots we want to replace in IB to the Gallery section, like this one. Also, as you may already have noticed, original icons files with black shadows are usually larger than the ones without (not because of the shadows but the pure icon size), so it might be better to use the shadowed ones for both larger size and uniformity? There’s another thing, template within a template will break the classic editor, in this case, using or "template:Item drops" in any IB will trigger the case, also the Item drops template isn’t portable yet. So what I’m suggesting for now is to type ToB (or add links like ToB if desired) and input item names as usual in creatures’ IB, then add the Items drops to the Creature’s IB below should you like it. Sorry for the inconveniences, and I really hope fandom staffs can fix this long-existing flaw asap. In IB, the image on top is usually reserved for portraits, or for items, the large images in in-game description, while icons & codes are located on the bottom. There’re difficult cases such as creatures without portraits, and currently the in-game images of these creatures appear on top, while at the same time in-game images for items appear on bottom. We might just remove the in-game row from IB as people can always use to do it, or find another way to solve the problem. If I missed something, do remind me in your next message :-) Islandking (talk) 03:41, October 6, 2017 (UTC) ---- #Thank you, and if you can, please try to make the template portable. Also, I’ve removed the usages of “Template:Screenshot” with bot and modified “Template:Fairuse” based on FRwikia, so you may use the latter instead, for wider usage, such as videos. #I’ll look into it later, as I recall there’re many different cases #Odd, try Defender of Easthaven, Wand of Frost pages instead, mine will say “Rich text editing has been disabled because the page contains complex code.” #Yes, item drops should be at bottom as the current item IB has the corresponding row at bottom, any top ones are likely done before the row was added. When you attempt to pick up items by clicking on the pile the dead creature drops, it has the 3 columns & 2 rows format just like the image you’ve shown me, and actually, attaching images in the “Items drops” row in IB might be a way to go, need more thinkings on this. Islandking (talk) 14:59, October 6, 2017 (UTC) :Alright, for shadowed icons, refer to BOW21, which is Darkfire Bow, the two icons are different in size, with the shadowed one larger. There're many cases as well, you may browse it as you please. Yes I understand the transparent case, but we might have to stick with the shadow because of how the game is built. :Islandking (talk) 15:06, October 6, 2017 (UTC) ---- By "chose a random entry inside the infobox (damage type) and added " I sssume you mean CE's source mode, which should work all the time. When I was mentioning CE, I was referring to its visual mode, try to reopen these two pages, you don’t need to edit anything, just try to switch to CE’s visual mode, you’ll get the same error message. 3x2 drop format should be constant in all versions. Islandking (talk) 15:46, October 6, 2017 (UTC) ---- Well that's new, here's what I see, the same as http://community.wikia.com/wiki/Help:Classic_editor, so you may consider filing a bug report . Islandking (talk) 01:22, October 7, 2017 (UTC) Re: Spell Progression Tables Sure, but not sure my .2da is entirely untouched by mods though, I have SCS changed HLA spells into special ability, just let you know in case that’d affect the table. Good job on the new progression page, the only concern is the naming, since there’s already a “Experience Table”, maybe we should name it “Spell Progression Tables (wizard)” instead? Also I recall there’s a Construction template, see if you like it :-) MXSPLWIZ.2da: 2DA V1.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 3 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 10 4 4 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 11 4 4 4 3 3 0 0 0 0 12 4 4 4 4 4 1 0 0 0 13 5 5 5 4 4 2 0 0 0 14 5 5 5 4 4 2 1 0 0 15 5 5 5 5 5 2 1 0 0 16 5 5 5 5 5 3 2 1 0 17 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 2 0 18 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 2 1 19 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 1 20 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 21 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 22 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 23 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 24 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 25 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 26 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 3 27 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 28 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 29 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 30 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 31 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 32 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 33 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 34 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 35 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 36 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 37 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 38 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 39 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 40 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 Islandking♔ ♙ 15:32, October 20, 2017 (UTC) This and that, mostly about Spell Progression Tables Hello CompleCCity, A few other things first :-) We usually add disambiguation suffix and leave a redirect link, e.g. “Energy Blades” ->”Energy Blade (disambiguation), see the Baldur's Gate (disambiguation) page. I put “Companion Baeloth Barrityl is a sorcerer” not as a note, more as a piece of gameplay info because it affects players who want to play as a sorcerer in BGEE to reconsider their choice as there’s already a companion with the same class kit around. About your recent project: If you’re going to add more info other than tables, then “Tables” should be omitted indeed. Well actually, you and Faalagorn have different approaches about upper-casing :-) , but I’m backing Faalagorn’s suggestion, standardizing the casing - upper for all articles (except for suffix, by, on, of etc) and lower for all categories. Yes I’ll rename some quest names (eventually) so that they’ll be the same as Journal shown in xxKeeper, which is upper-cased as well. Take a look at “Mage#Spell slots progression”, which already has level-game dependencies in it, and integrated into the table, which is I’d suggest: to try to put all info (except the differences from PnP, etc of course) into table instead of leaving notes here and there like many other sites, messy… actually you’re doing quite well on implementing INT info into your table. How to group your pages is much depending on how long the pages will be, if they aren’t too long, perhaps integrating them into “Mage”/”Class Name” page and upgrading its “Spell slots progression” section is much preferred, then we copy all sections from spell-casting classes and put them into “Spell Progression” page, replacing “Spell Progression Tables”, with both of them built for the same purpose: to provide quick combinations between different classes for readers conveniences, which a “Spell Progression (disambiguation)” cannot do, nor will the disambiguation be so different from the “Classes” page where readers can find links to each class page and scroll down for its spell progression section. I’ll leave minor twists (Italic, bold…) to you, my only suggestion (for now) on this matter is to make “–“ into blank cells, for this offers more contrast to the numbered cells, thus be more conspicuous to tell when mages start to gain slot from a certain level, see Mage#Spell slots progression Islandking♔ ♙ 11:09, October 21, 2017 (UTC) Actually, should be Total spell slots for mage because mage do not auto learn spells, sorcerers however, use Total spells AND total spell slots :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 12:32, October 21, 2017 (UTC) ---- A quick reply: But I didn't like your re-ordering of width and rowspan – that seemed arbitrary. You don't have to show me that you're admin, here – I know of that. :: Which, unfortunately, is the auto-correct from Visual Editor, I didn't do the reordering, just add "slots" :-) , where's the "show you admin part" come from ? Islandking♔ ♙ 13:11, October 21, 2017 (UTC) ---- Well I mean instead of typing “–“, how about input nothing in there, see Mage#Spell slots progression table, which offers more contrast between numbered cells and “Nothing” cells, thus be more conspicuous to tell when mages start to gain slot from certain levels. I mean if your content isn’t long, instead of dedicated pages, can you put the content to Mage#Spell slots progression etc. sections instead, thus updating the section, then we compile all spell progression sections into “Spell Progression” page, which has both the tables and extra info, replacing “Spell Progression Tables” which only has tables? Those Mage and Mage (Baldur's Gate) pages exist before I know this site, I generally update the former, leaving the latter intact, there’re indeed things different between those two, which make it hard to make them into one page I guess, not sure how to deal with them though, the latter doesn’t attract much visits as the former anyways. Which is a bit awkward, as you might’ve noticed, I usually put an extra bullet in “Gameplay” section, because I thought that’d serve as an indicator to tell people that the “Gameplay” section is never, and will never be finished, to encourage people and tell them where to put the insights… Islandking♔ ♙ 13:45, October 21, 2017 (UTC) ---- Not a personal preference thing, but blank is better than “–“ when it comes to function, it tells which levels mage get spell slots in a more visual way, try to delete "–" and leave those cells blank and see it for yourself. Alright, the extra bullet does give the section an unpolished feeling, well if it doesn’t work as it’s intended, I’ll delete it from the pages I touch in future. Islandking♔ ♙ 14:06, October 21, 2017 (UTC) ---- Hello, Seeing how BG, and BGII have been widely used, can it be better to name black pits as BP and BPII ? Islandking♔ ♙ 14:41, October 21, 2017 (UTC) ---- Yes, there’re TotSC, SoD, and ToB, but they’re generally expansions within the storyline of bg1 or bg2, there’s BGII instead of SoA because Erik wants to note the big 1 ->2 jump, and fortunately, this approach works quite well with BGII:EE. Although we always have to manually add (SoA) etc, to make it like BGII:EE(SoA) to specify the exact campaign but in general, it works good. Technically, “T” should be added, but in reality, forum rarely use TBP, people just input BP, BPII/BP2, (though it raises the confusion between AI- BP series, which is a mod). Are you sure Mage in BPII can reach lv33, never knew that myself :P Will get to the spell progression topic later :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 02:04, October 22, 2017 (UTC) ---- Hello CompleCCity Your “Which layout to take?” is valuable for players who take on mulit- route, so what I have in mind is that instead of the text format, could you convert them into tables and update the current multi-classing pages, such as Fighter / Mage , (Fighter → Mage page is for the dual-classing). Also in “Spell Progression (Tables)” page, we add a section for two class multi mages (Duo mage mulit-, Double mage multi- maybe, would not use “dual multi-classes mages” though, to avoid confusion) plus a section for triple class mage multi, then add the tables there. Islandking♔ ♙ 04:42, October 22, 2017 (UTC) ---- To elaborate, the “Spell Progression (Table)” page could look like this: *Mage > Mage tables here **Specialist and Wild Mage > Their tables here (worth a subheading? Maybe only shown in caption) *Sorcerer **Dragon Disciple >same above *Cleric *Druid *Bard *Paladin *Ranger *Shaman *Two class multi **Has Mage > Mage progession tables for 2 class multis who has mage class in it **Has Cleric **Has Druid **Has Ranger *Three class multi **Has Mage **Has Cleric This way, I’m not sure the table under Level caps of Spell Progression (wizard) is that useful because the spell level info has already been implemented into the above tables, also that table has the limitations of showing only mage’s spell level right now, which is a bit confusing… what about cleric, druid etc? Keep in mind the divine classes are equally treated in multi-classing. Islandking♔ ♙ 07:08, October 22, 2017 (UTC) ---- Also consider merging the extended lv34-lv40+ into the main table since BG, BGII, ToB etc are already there. Islandking♔ ♙ 07:45, October 22, 2017 (UTC) ---- I see you set up a transclude in Spell Progression Tables, I have a question: Will opening Spell Progression Tables page also open the transcluded Spell Progression (wizard) page in background, I asked this because I noticed a delay in opening and initiating editing on the page. If yes, I'd suggest you retain from using the transclude due to the potential proformance impact once all transcludes were added. If no, then go ahead, "MageSpell Progression" is indeed a better name than the Spell Progression (wizard) suffix. Islandking♔ ♙ 12:39, October 22, 2017 (UTC) About spell progression tables I don’t mind, use the name if you see it fit :-) Can't test it myself since I’ve removed my XP cap, I’ll ask post on BD forum, see if I can get some info. Dedicated progression tables for multi probably is the best solution, and you don’t have to list all multi-class combinations: The mage table for all two-class mage multis such as cleric/mage, fighter/mage is the same, so one table will do; same for cleric table of two-class cleric multis such as cleric/mage, fighter/cleric. Plus the triple class multi tables which only need two (one is mage, one is cleric) Gnome’s illusionist has the extra slot just like the sp mages, good call on that one, which probably worth an extra table. You can always start working on tables, we’ll sort out the subheading things later, much easier than the tables :-) I know why you add up to level 40, I just say you don’t have to split table into “basic” and “expanded” because we already have , , templates as indicators which levels can be reached for the corresponding campaign, and if you prefer, you can always add an overhead warning like “xxx levels cannot be reached without mod” etc. I like your transclude idea, but like I said, if it raises performance issues, we’ll have no choice but to drop it, I’ll consult Faalagorn about it. The naming of “Mage” or “Wizard” will depend on your page content. Wizard will have to include sorcerers, which is why they’re called “Wizard Spellbook” not “Mage Spellbook” because the book is also shared by sorcerers (actually, I think the better naming should be “Arcane Spellbook” because bards can also cast from it, but you get the general idea). Back to topic, as of now I see your page only has mage info, no sorcerers, and like the dnd naming "Class Spell Progression" (there’s no “Wizard” class in BG) so it should be “Mage Spell Progression” indeed, also not sure why you want to use suffix, afaik, there’s no (mage) suffix on this wiki. But again, I’ll have to wait for Faalagorn’s reply for the decision, at the same time, feel free to add more tables, we can always sort them later. Islandking♔ ♙ 16:41, October 22, 2017 (UTC) About the transclusion Hello CompleCCity, Here is the answer I get from central forum, which explains why I got the delay, what do you think, there’ll be 14+ (roughly calculated) transclustion tables in Spell Progression page. I wouldn’t recommend to do it, but I have no obligations If you insist, but would you update the corresponding class pages (Mage, Druid, Fighter/Mage) instead then make transclustions to SP page from those pages? Islandking♔ ♙ 12:06, October 26, 2017 (UTC) ---- Couldn't find it in preview, do you spot one from Special page: but the delay shouldn't be caused by performance as Saftzie explained. Subpages is perferred, because creating templates will... make people who're not familar with table codes (like me) hard to edit them :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 12:42, October 26, 2017 (UTC) ---- Haven’t paid much attention to the special page before I was given the admin tools, so I post the screenshot in case it looks different when viewed from normal accounts. Afaik, templates can only edit in source mode, but I always use visual mode or visual editors when making tables, also there may be others like me. :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 13:06, October 26, 2017 (UTC) ---- Please make it to subpages just in case :-) Top of the week from my view: 1. Gejadus 60 contributions 2. Croninlol 9 contributions 3. Aznxknight 1 contribution 4. Jonathonjones 1 contribution Wouldn't surprised to see it like this considerring even lists from Insights are not accurate :-{ Islandking♔ ♙ 13:27, October 26, 2017 (UTC) Re: Game superscripts Ike's opinion Three things to consider: The BGEE symbol isn’t very distinguishable from classic BG symbol, or ToB, they’re similar skull style. (btw the BGIIEE icon you used should stand for classic SoA instead) How large the symbols will be? From the samples you made, they’re a bit small (especially for tablet users), but will the larger ones fit well into IB? Don’t forget our old friends: BGIIEE:SoA, BGIIEE:ToB, how to separate those campaigns with icons? I guess this game is a very special case compared to other game series which can easily be transferred into icons, it’s only getting more complicated after EEs were introduced. Islandking♔ ♙ 10:15, October 27, 2017 (UTC) Faalagorn's opinion I actually like the icons! They are more clearer for me, especially when grouped together near each oher, easier to read than existing text. The size is easily tweakable, as MediaWiki handles resizing the images. The tooltips are still labeled BG:EE and so on, so it should be clear, and if someone blocks the images (globally on browser or via some ad-blocker rule), the alt text should display + the link still points to the same attributes. There may indeed be confusion about the vanilla and EE editions, though all the campaigns did get an unique icon – including both Black Pits. For mobile, there is actually a more severe issue with the existing et. al. templates – they are incorrectly parsed and when I tried to access for example the companions page on my phone, it is showing an extra newlines in and after the template, each time the template is used. I can attach a screenshot later on. Seeing we never got any report about this bug here though, may mean we don't have much mobile views anyway, at least among the contributors :). Also, it should be kept in mind that icons are often used in such places, be it other wikis or our ( ) template. P.S. Since I was AWOL for the past few weeks or so, I never had occasion to welcome you CompleCCity; welcome on board, nice to have new editors in here :). It may take me a while to take a look of what has changed here, and I'm currently having a break from playing BG:EE (planning to return soon-ish though), so feel free to point me on things if some kind of opinion is needed from my side in the meantime! —Faalagorn☎/ 15:45, October 27, 2017 (UTC) Ike's opinion (2) Some candidates I’ve extracted from NI: Update: 1, And you can extract classic icons without glow for classic campaigns, icons should be around LOGOXX.bam 2, We also need to cover cases such as Wand of Frost, where "BG" there actually stands for BGTotSCBGEESoDBP, "BGII" stands for BGIIToBBGIIEEBPII. We might need customized some icons here, ideas? Update: 3, Also need to consider pages with different content between pre-EE and EE, like Poison Weapon, not a good example but that’s the gist, and many spells function differently in between versions. If you have the skills in image editing, you can cut the lower portion which contains Enhanced Edition in and make it into icon to stand for EE. For classic versions, might crop Baldur’s Gate from . Or you have better substitutes ? Update: Islandking♔ ♙ 05:37, October 28, 2017 (UTC) cCC's opinion Thanks for the welcome, Faalagorn! And feel welcome yourself on my talk page! Actually I intended to answer right after you, but then came Ike – and presented stuff to work with already, despite having so many concerns … :) Let me tell you, I share these concerns. But I also think, there are ways to evade them. ; About icon size The size I used in my examples on your talk pages (see User talk:Islandking#Game superscripts or User talk:Faalagorn#Game superscripts) is 14px, which – for a circular icon – would mirror the regular font size in height and width, though reduced per to (I think) 80%. Have in mind that this is the width of the icon – non-circular ones, like the one used for BGII:EE, have then a larger height than 14 pixels. Surely we can use 16px instead, or even more – that depends on how distinguishable the icons are in the end. ; About icon choice I took my examples from those icons used in the userbox templates. You find a good overview of them on Buttercheese's user profile. In the classic games' files there unfortunately is no LOGO*.bam, but they are contained in other files (can't recall the exact name right now). I've already extracted the one from BG, which is smaller than some already upped icon here, but I think that one is scaled. For TotSC there is no official and unique icon, we have to use the one from the official guide (already used in the userbox). Which leads us to … ; About differences between games and add-ons, and abbreviations A note to Faalagorn: I only can speak from a classic point of view – I don't own the enhanced editions, yet. Okay, we have BG and TotSC, and for certain things we have to distinguish between them. Also we have SoA and ToB, and have to distinguish between them. There's no need of discussion about SoD, BP1 and BP2. But: Do we have to distinguish between BG:EE and TotSC:EE? And are there any differences between SoA:EE and ToB:EE? Or could those simply be summarized as BG(2):EE? To elaborate this further: if an item only appears in TotSC, does it then generally appear in BG:EE? If a creature only appears in ToB, does it then appear in the general BGII:EE? Or only in ToB:EE? (Is there still a choice between both campaigns when starting the game?) A list, a row of icons looks better than that listing of letters in your second topic, Ike. ;) ; About icon customization In general we should keep away from this. Customizing copyrighted images from the game files might break copyright laws (not sure about this), and also might lead to contributors thinking "ah, that's not the original file, I have to re-up this …" But chosing the icon from a game guide already is some sort of customization. And altering satuation, brightness and contrast of the cBG and BG:EE icons might be necessary to make them more distinguishable. Perhaps the same for SoA and SoA:EE … (Yes, the glow should be removed as well …) So much about my thoughts, yet. Will come back to this later … I'm not sure, I've understood your third topic, Ike. -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 10:59, October 28, 2017 (UTC) A quick reply from Ike We don’t have to separate BGEE and BGEE:TotSC because the content are merged together and can be freely accessed anytime in BGEE. (eg. From Nashkel to Durlag Tower) However we have to separate SoA, ToB, BGIIEE:SoA, BGIIEE:ToB because as already mentioned, these campaigns are NOT ''transferable, which is different from the above case (take a look at some "Items in XXX" categories) No, I’d insist keeping EE icons glow and classic icons not glow because that’s the way to distinguish them. Eg. classic SoA’d be the same as BGIIEE:SoA just without glow, etc. Also as you might’ve noticed, BGEE ones are glowing red while BGIIEE are yellow, which are the additional ways to show differences in visual. Islandking♔ ♙ 11:34, October 28, 2017 (UTC) Update (1) from Ike My friend has helped me made some desired icons, all are cropped from NI extracted files. I’ve updated the tables above to reflect some changes, what’s left are classic icons. A side note: once icons replace the texts, we’ll have to use BGII:SoA+BGII:ToB, two icons to stand for classic BGII; BGIIEE:SoA+BGIIEE:ToB both to stand for BGIIEE. But I guess that’s the same way as BGEE+BG:SoD, and SoD is actually a part of BGEE, if you consider BGEE as BGIIEE:SoA, then BG:SoD is its BGIIEE:ToB. Now it makes me hungry for a real expansion to BGIIEE which tells us what happens after the throne battle, there’s already a mod for it :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 03:15, October 29, 2017 (UTC) Just a note I'm working on the classic icons, but as there's no LOGO.bam it takes some time to find the best one … -- -- You talkin' to me? -- cC -- 15:03, October 29, 2017 (UTC) Help on IB horizontal layout Hi there, I just created IB test and horizontally laid some fields to save space, but I encountered a problem that some have two lines which looks ugly, try to fill the fields on that IB and you’ll see what I mean, do you have some solutions to it? Islandking♔ ♙ 15:05, November 13, 2017 (UTC) ---- I shortened ''Breath to Brth which seems to be a legit abb, but the ideal situation is to use its full name, especially for Slashing, Crushing etc that have been made to Slash, Crush... don't make much sense, to be honest. Tried , didn't seem to work :-( Islandking♔ ♙ 11:58, November 14, 2017 (UTC) ---- The Dex, Con, Wis and Cha have two lines, ugly... And yes, also the 18/100 looks like 18/10 Islandking♔ ♙ 12:02, November 14, 2017 (UTC) DPL? This extension seems to cover everything this site needs for SMW (or it’s just another name of SMW). If we have it, then there’s no need to create “Long Swords in game title” as a simple query of “Long Swords” + desired game title will do. Also opens for more possibilities such as queries of Who’re the human chaotic evil enemy mages in SoA… There’s another check if you have some time, CompleCCity. Some people say there’s no save for Axe of the Unyielding +5 (AX1H15)’s vorpal hits in classic editions. Could you check the item’s Item ability 0 and see if its Kill target (13)’s Save type is ( No save ); In EE it’s Paralyze/Poison/Death(2), save bonus is -4. Thank you. Islandking♔ ♙ 14:30, November 24, 2017 (UTC) ---- Well think nothing of it really, and do double check my edits occasionally, sometimes I made silly mistakes :-D. Islandking♔ ♙ 13:02, November 25, 2017 (UTC) ---- I ehh... mistook the capital letter "T" for a name... very silly really, I rather not talk about it :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 13:25, November 25, 2017 (UTC) ---- Thanks. I also found this. Seems there’s much competition going on among these similar extensions, mainly we have DPL, SMW, and Cargo. From what I read, SMW is offers more options than DPL, thus a direct upgrade to the DPL, but is harder to use & requires a lot maintenance & has many compatibility issues. While Cargo is more friendly and ease-to-use. Anyhow, it’s still shocking to see Gamepedia is trending to forgo SMW and towards Cargo, guess Fandom’s made a wise choice after all: in this fast-changing field, it’s best to wait to let them decide who’s the best first before fully support one. Maybe we should do the same :-). Islandking♔ ♙ 02:15, November 27, 2017 (UTC) About the area page images This area topic is somehow related to the previous discussion I had with Faalagorn. I was previously against the idea of separating each area to its dedicated page as I thought it’s better to group the small areas within a larger map (such as the caves in Gnolls Stronghold be present in its parent map), but Faalagorn has his technical view so we later came to the decision of listing caves in the big area while proceeding to create dedicated pages of these caves at the same time. The further question is how do we list them? Option 1:Gallery the floor maps into a single IB, see the overhead slider on Baldur's Gate: Siege of Dragonspear Walkthrough by Enilwyn/Elfsong Tavern for the rough idea. Option 2: Have multiple IBs for each floor (each with its own floor map), and separate them with headings, much like Staff of the Ram. Option 3: Dedicated page for each floor, nav box below to link them to its own pages (normally I’d against this idea as it’s better fit for dungeons with multi-floor such as Watcher’s Keep and Spellhold rather than the Gnolls Stronghold or Friendly Arm Inn) Islandking♔ ♙ 04:37, November 27, 2017 (UTC) ---- The discussion is rather fractional, but it generally starts from the line below Re: Rework the achievements (2) and Areas, Buildings, Temples infoboxes If the already amazing NI's new features were all implemented, I’m also thinking of sildering maps just like the SoD WKT instead of showing in the IB, this way the maps will be large enough to view the map notes texts in them. Islandking♔ ♙ 09:47, November 27, 2017 (UTC) Implement Str (strength mod) in IB:test, or no? Maybe it's time to horizontally line those ability scores now :-) ? Not very sure about the newly added field though, because for consistancy there should be a "Total Scores (strength mod)" for "Total Scores", which seems redundant, especially when "Total Scores" have to be listed separately below to avoid double lines. One solution is to omit "Str (strength mod)" and manually add should we spot one, which shouldn't be a hard work as creatures with strengh mod aren't that many. Islandking♔ ♙ 16:06, December 4, 2017 (UTC) ---- Yep that was very late for my time zone, midnight then, so I actually fell asleep after sending the message lol. I was referring to IB creature (and potentially IB companion) as IB test was aiming to improve that. 18/100 or 18.100, whatever it is, is better than 18/00 or 18.00 even the game describes so, NI describes it as “Strength bonus”, ranging from 0 to 100 and imo causes less confusion. "Total Scores" can use a separate line, so it doesn't interfere with the six scores line, but its percentile must be kept as the same format as Str (strength mod), if any. And good luck with the tests :-), if 18 with 100 can be shirked into one line that’d be great, and even if it’s not possible, shouldn’t bother readers that much as creatures with percentile strength are not many. Islandking♔ ♙ 02:58, December 5, 2017 (UTC) ---- I see, but consider the possibility of omitting “Strength Mod”, for one, there’re already many fields on IB creatures, if that were to be implemented, there’ll be two more (for “Total Scores”); second, as said, there’re not many creatures that need the Strength Mod. Of course, if you can find a way to shrink the percentile into one line, that’d be far better, and in that case that’d be necessary to have the “Strength Mod”. But do consider it a minor task and no push here, as that’s really not that urgent :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 13:48, December 5, 2017 (UTC) Re: EE GUI names Sure, I’m happy to help, if you want to know anything about EE, just ask :-) The tooltip of the mage book menu is: W : Mage Book The tooltip of the priest book menu is: P : Priest Scroll And the screenshots to the right: Edit: EE1 changes MAGE BOOK from the sceenshot to Mage Book, others are the same. Islandking♔ ♙ 14:38, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- Yes, that's inconsistency (I forgot what classics looks like :-). The menus should be the same for all classes, I just double checked sp mage, bard, sorcerer, ranger & druid, they produce the same result. Islandking♔ ♙ 15:09, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- Oh I see. Do you plan to merge Arcane Spells (Baldur's Gate II) etc pages? I’ll prompt the merge if that’s your intention. Also, there’re arcane & divine spell pages on PIHwiki, those info is directly from NI so that’d serve as good references for your current project, be sure to check them. But be careful of the copyrights, stuffs like that. I always wanted to do a thorough updates to spells using NI, but sadly other add-ons must take priority before that and it’d take a VERY LONG time before I actually get into spells so I’d very appreciate your work :-) You may also want to check the spell range info as the in-game descriptions are purely wrong on that. Let me know if you got any questions about reading spells in NI. Islandking♔ ♙ 16:06, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- A few suggestions if I may :-) about formatting, due to the limited space on Fandom sites, might merge the Spell & Code column, making it look like to save space. Also may omit Game column as spells are mostly based on caster’s levels, so stating up to which spell level mages/bards in BG1 can get is sufficient, saving more space for Notes (which is like the Gameplay section I assume?) Or, the formatting in those two pages is well worth the considerations, listing Spell levels as Heading 2, and spells within as Heading 3, this way, more info can be put into. The time in-game is listed in Round and in NI in EE Armor's duration is shown as 2700 (secs), which is 2700/300=9 in-game hours. Islandking♔ ♙ 17:10, December 7, 2017 (UTC) ---- Oh, so you plan to prioritize the sorting function and make the page more a list than detailed expansion. In that case, dudleyville’s mage & priest spell lists may serve a better reference about what’s to be listed (and no copyrights issue if porting from there). We may even implement a ranking system, stars :-) and of course, spell icons. Also, seems a''' | between etc in a table cell breaks the CE’s visual mode, omitting that? Because later we’ll have the game title icons to replace the plain texts so the '''| will not be needed. Bards can only learn up to lv 6 spells. I never knew Armor’s duration was THAT long in the classics, seems very OP Identify (arcane) was intended to be in better consistency with the cases like Dispel Magic (arcane), Dispel Magic (divine), and potentially Dispel Magic (inquisitor), while at the same time readers will know only arcane casters may cast the spell. I really don’t know how to deal with the cases such as North Forest, those are not as easy to be unifyly named as the Identify (arcane), I can give some names to them but I fear everyone will have different opinions how they should be named so I just go ahead and use codes instead. I think it might be in better consistency because I plan to add enemy specific spells & items pages to this wiki, so there’d be many versions of Maze, Haste, Ring etc, which can only be identified via codes (different types of enemies share the same spells/items and they’re just named as Weapon, Ring, Belt …), I guess this is a pretty BG specific problem. Islandking♔ ♙ 10:38, December 8, 2017 (UTC) Re: Arcane Spells *The author of the two pages seems to reserve those # for spell icons but never finished the job. *Needed columns: **Cross links – Check. Beside similar effects, may also include direct opposite ones such as Haste to Slow **Description – No. Same reason, too long. **Further info: ***Duration sorted by Fixed, Increased (with level), Permanent, Special ***Range sorted by None, Touch, Ranged, Special ***Area of Effect sorted by Self, Single, AoE, Special ***ST sorted by Neg, ½, None, Special ***Magic Resistance sorted by Block, Bypass, Special ***I would also implement Casting Time, scroll availability for divine spells and Affected Allegiances (Party, Enemy, All), if possible **In NI, the spell types are sorted by secondary school flags: NONE, BATTLEGROUND, COMBATPROTECTIONS, COMBINATION, CONJURATION, CONTINGENCY, DISABLING, DIVINATIONATTACK, FL#DISEASE, ILLUSIONARYPROTECTIONS, INSECTS, MAGICATTACK, NON-COMBAT, OFFENSIVEDAMAGE, PROUNDEAD, SPECIFICPROTECTIONS, SPELLPROTECTIONS, SPELLSHIELD. They can be useful, as some spell types are destined to dispel some others, such as Spellstrike (MAGICATTACK) dispels Globe of Invulnerability (SPELLPROTECTIONS). Though few exceptions exist but the rule generally applies. **Well actually School is more important, it defines which spell pool sp mage can have ST augments as well as who may not use it. The ST augment even work for dual- multis, eg, a Transmuter > Cleric carries an insane -5-2=-7 penalty when casting Silence, 15' Radius, because the spell is Alteration school which is specialized by Transmuters even if it’s a divine spell. *Spell level is still needed, it’s an important factor which defines items such as Potion of Magic Blocking, and spells such as Minor Globe of Invulnerability *Yes I still purpose omitting Game, and no splitting into articles & subpages, for there’s SoD, which increases Exp threadhold, and it makes BG1 somewhat inaccurate because SoD is generally considered as BG1. Also don’t forget that different campaigns have different Exp caps, plus the many class differences in spell slot progression, all of which make it very hard to define. As said, an overview of which classes can get which spell levels at which campaigns is more than sufficient for this info. So, with so many columns in mind, the space is very competing, may shrink the font size further. Have you considered omitting Notes section? That’d save a lot of space. Feel free to test it in the sandbox. Ranking is just a thought, a more acceptable solution is to make it like “Notable Spells”, and implemented it by changing the background color of the spell cell to make it look important. Also applies for the druid, cleric specific spells separation, by changing the background color in different cells. Examples below, submits to change: Islandking♔ ♙ 09:17, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- Some columns can be omitted, if the space gets too crowded. The ST advantages for sp mages should be there no matter the game version, yes, the classic description didn’t mention that. SoD is integrated in BG1EE and has an increased exp cap of 500k, so that’s more levels for spell casters than TotSC. And so there'd be three BG1 caps: pre-TotSC, post-TotSC(BG1EE) and post-SoD caps. BP1 even complicates the matter further. Alright, no rankings then, the idea is a bit tentative anyways. Nope, didn’t know the list before, by looking at it, there’re ideas from it well worth considering, thanks! Islandking♔ ♙ 15:39, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- See here, "There are other previously '''undocumented '''benefits to specialization besides an extra spell slot per level", the statement was made based on classic edition, because in EE, it's documented. Also keep in mind the "NONE" school research, which is the same way how sp ST advantages are implemented. Of course you can ask in the BD forum for more confirmations. Edit: Oh I mean the link you posted can help me build some spell pages, unrelated to your current project. Islandking♔ ♙ 15:56, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- Just a quick reply, is it technically possible to create Flail (non-player whatever the name is) parent page, then Flail (code1.item), Flail (code2.itm), etc as its subpages, and merge them into tabview, such as your User:CompleCCity/Ramazith's Tower? Islandking♔ ♙ 02:32, December 10, 2017 (UTC) Re: Disambiguations Well the Fallout wiki guide page you linked has Harry (disambiguation) as examples. CHAN21 is only found on Balthazar's mercenaries. (I separate Light Armor and Heavy Armor mostly based on the class usages) As far as I’ve checked, suffix here mostly use full names (Baldur’s Gate), (Baldur’s Gate II), so (Shadows of Amn) or (SoA) may flag as different standards? Thoughts about the non-player spells & equipment, some are even unnamed, what about them? In fact, the real consistency would be suffix all by codes, but I fear that’s gone too far, is it? Consider the code suffix an advantage of BG series, as we have the convenient tool NI which many games lack so they have no choice but to make made names with different standards. Yes, I’m aware of some capital letters in some suffix, they should be changed. Islandking♔ ♙ 09:52, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- (disambiguation) not acceptable even when I’ve made redirects to them :-)? I only sought consistency, say what about there’re two, or more equally important elements with the same name, like Baldur's Gate, the city and the game, is it the Harry’s case or Peter? And our close neighborhood have many disambigs... The non-player items may not be accessed through normal means, but they’re important info for the bestiary, as they define the immunity, and many other special characteristics of the creature. I’ll move the lengthy description from, say IB of Demogorgon page to the IB of the Item page, and list more detailed info ported from NI to the item page’s main article, this way, casual players can just have a glance at its IB to get the item’s general function, while advanced players will be more interested in the detailed .eff info elaborated in the main article. I’ve tried to just list the combined results of those items to the creature page, but believe me, that’s too general and some info can be very hard to define, such as THAC0, there’re just too many factors in it to define the creature’s final THAC0. It’s far better and easier to just show the base value, then list all non-player items separately, which looks professional and will produce less error compared to calculating the final THAC0 number myself. All in all, what I’m try to say is, non-player items, at least some of them, are worth dedicated pages, so the question is how to find proper names for them. Generally, I think it’s OK to suffix codes on those items/spells as they’re aimed for people who’re willing to go in depth with this game anyways so they wouldn’t mind the codes. As long as we don’t use code suffix for player accessed items which casual players are willing to see, I say it’s fine, even if it’s meant to be inconsistency in naming. Some unnamed non-player items have categories in NI, such as Amulets and necklaces, Flails etc, in them. So we can use Flail (code.itm) to name them. In fact, there’s already a page named Plate Mail (PLAT99) from 2013 :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 16:06, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- Typing Baldur’s Gate in the search bar and most of the results will be game titles (which is inevitable), but if readers just hit enter after the typing, they’ll end up with the disambig page, same goes for other typings. Yes, indeed, Faalagorn would say it should be the city Re: Baldur's Gate (city) :“''Also, people already on BGWiki are more likely to search some info about the city, as they already know things about the game they are playing''”, very personal based. Also, links below the reply show that different wikis have different standards, some prioritize the city, some the game. Imo, best to play safe than make any presumptions, even if for spells like Dispel Magic, not want to guess how many people are looking for (or linking) the arcane version or how many for the divine. Faalagorn proposed a dedicated “Baldur’s Gate Series” article, but I’m not sure what to put into the article so the page is still not created :-) Islandking♔ ♙ 08:59, December 10, 2017 (UTC) tabber/tabview (2) Well the only adventage of that is its parent page is not named with codes Flail (non-player) so won't force the search bar to list so many Flail (code.itm)s, or so I think. Islandking♔ ♙ 14:41, December 10, 2017 (UTC) Re: Quote placing Actually I prefer quotes to on top :-), but after some time I see Faalagorn began to move them to the sides, so I checked some big wikis like Sarevok Anchev article at Villains Wiki, seems they’re doing as Faalagorn did, and it somehow makes scense as the overhead space can be reserved for template Stub, so I started to change them to sides when I see them. Do you have some examples that say otherwise? Islandking♔ ♙ 09:52, December 9, 2017 (UTC) ---- Flail (Baddest enemy at all) This name won't work, because Flail (code1.itm) maybe shared by many non-players, plus the template within IB will break CE. Islandking♔ ♙ 15:29, December 10, 2017 (UTC) Cleaning Hello CompleCCity, no, I'm not offended at all. I'm just busy. I'm very thankful if you help me to improve the stuff on these Walkthrough pages. In the beginning I wrote on Word and then transferred it to this Wiki. I faced many problems. In the meantime I always write immediately on this Wiki pages for time sake. So I'm playing on the weekend again, from Monday - Friday probably not. Have a nice Christmas Time! Gejadus (talk) 23:19, December 9, 2017 (UTC) Re: Armor class/type Apparently BG 1&2 only have two armor/class grouping, leather, hide armor for rogue, druids and shamans; splint, chainmail, plate mail only wearable by warriors and clerics, there’re a few exception, such as elven chainmail, but should work 90% of the time. FRW categorized Hide armor in medium, but chain armor is somewhat inconsistency as it appears in all three. Creating the medium armor cat. will prove to be beneficial after all, though for the current game state, there’ll only be hide armor in it, chainmail better stays in heavy for the sake of the class usage. Thank you for willing to recat, and if you have extra time, please merge “Armor Class: 3” and “vs. Slashing: -3 bonus to armor class” etc into “Armor Class: 3 (0 vs. slashing)” as the game description shows when you see them, because “vs. xxxx” are legacy fields. Never played NWN2 sadly, since NWN1EE is on the schedule, there may as well be NWN2EE? Islandking♔ ♙ 09:22, December 10, 2017 (UTC)